Nessling Foundation’s Science and Executive Director, Iina Koskinen, has dedicated her career to exploring how science influences society. In her view, foundations should now turn their focus to what society could look like after the sustainability transformation.
Iina Koskinen, you are starting as the Science and Executive Director at the Nessling Foundation. Who are you and where do you come from?
I am a curious soul, fascinated by fundamental questions about humanity. At the same time, I enjoy getting things done. For the past eight years, I have worked at the think tank Demos Helsinki, developing its research activities. Over the course of my career, I have also worked at the University of Helsinki, at the largest science festival in the Nordic countries, and translated The Second Sex by Simone de Beauvoir into Finnish. In essence, my entire career has been revolved around working at the intersection of science and society, fostering co-creation and enhancing the impact of science. I see my work at the Nessling Foundation as a natural continuation of these efforts. I feel a sense of excitement and nervousness about this new role, which is a great sign – it means I’m engaging with something truly meaningful.
So you have translated Simone de Beauvoir. How did that happen?
I have always been fascinated by books, humanity, and conceptual thinking, which led me to study philosophy as my major at university. Through my thesis supervisor, I became part of a translation team working on The Second Sex. At the time, it had been 100 years since Simone de Beauvoir’s birth, and the Finnish publisher wanted to release a new edition of the book. However, de Beauvoir’s adopted daughter, Sylvie Le Bon, denied permission for a revised edition because the original Finnish translation was a shortened version of the thousand-page work. Le Bon insisted that any new edition must be a complete translation, ensuring that the book would receive the scholarly translation it deserved in different languages.
You were one of the authors of From Research to Action – A Researchers’s Guide to Communication and Impact (published only in Finnish). What key lesson from this book do you want to bring with you to the Nessling Foundation?
It’s been a while since we wrote the book, but one of its core ideas was that different scientific disciplines contribute to society in different ways. When it comes to the sustainability transformation, this means understanding the unique role and strengths of each field in driving large-scale systemic change. Every discipline is needed. Similarly, researchers have different strengths, and it’s essential to find a way to make an impact that feels natural to each individual. Not everyone has to be on prime-time TV, instead someone might be an excellent expert on local nature, guiding schoolchildren on nature excursions.
More broadly, what is the key to research impact?
It all starts with a society that values science. Alongside societal impact, I also want to emphasise the intrinsic impact of science itself. Without strong fundamental research, driven by curiosity and grounded in scientific methods, there can be no real impact. We should appreciate science as a system that rigorously tests knowledge and continuously generates new understanding.
We should appreciate science as a system that rigorously tests knowledge and continuously generates new understanding.
We are living in what is often called the decade of decisive action for solving the ecological crisis, and this idea is also at the core of the Nessling Foundation’s strategy. What should foundations do now that half of this decade of decisive action has already passed?
There is a difference between large international foundations and Finnish foundations, which are relatively small in comparison. On a global scale, I believe foundations and other private funders can sometimes step in where public authorities fail as long as the primary responsibility for sustainability funding and actions remains with democratically elected governments. For example, in the United States, when Trump withdrew from the Paris Agreement, Bloomberg Philanthropies, along with other funders, stepped in to cover the financial gap left by the administration.
At the same time, globally, less than two percent of philanthropy funding is currently directed towards climate action. This share needs to be increased systematically and decisively. Biodiversity efforts are also suffering from a funding gap, and in these areas, foundations could strengthen their impact by joining forces.
Foundations have the opportunity to act as vanguards, look far into the future, and focus on long-term outcomes. While impactful project funding is crucial, I also see the importance of providing stable, long-term core funding. In the case of the Nessling Foundation, I believe we should already start looking beyond the sustainability transition itself. Public funding is now focused on achieving carbon neutrality—but who will fund the vision for a world that is carbon negative?
Where can people spot you in your free time?
My children often take me to unexpected places. For example, I just played Star Wars with them in the forest. Also, my love for books hasn’t faded either. I read a lot and across all genres. Right now, I’m in the middle of Minna Silver’s brilliant Tutankhamon’s Secrets (published only in Finnish). I’m a beginner history enthusiast, currently exploring ancient Middle Eastern cultures (I’m progressing chronologically). I just read the news that the tomb of Pharaoh Thutmose II has been discovered, and I was pretty excited about it!
How can the ecological crisis be solved?
We must break away from the overconsumption of natural resources. We need long-term policies that extend beyond government terms. We need global cooperation. We need political pressure created by a free civil society. On a practical level, environmentally harmful subsidies must be abolished, and the funds should be redirected to initiatives that support biodiversity, for example. I believe that, especially in climate action, we will see technological solutions that bring quick wins. But the big question is understanding interconnections – no climate solution should be locked in without considering its impact on biodiversity, for instance.
To tackle all of this, we need research. The role of science is to guide political goals and push them forward, to contribute to solving the ecological crisis through for example technological and societal innovations, and more broadly, to help us live within the limits of our planet.
I think we should talk more about what actually drives the sustainability transformation. What are the systems that, for example, reshape how we move around? We might not need a new kind of car but rather a social innovation that changes why and how we travel altogether.
Finally, we need to reimagine the future, visions of life after the sustainability transformation, in which science also has a role. What could a truly transformed society look like?
Pictures: Annukka Pakarinen
